Forum rules
Any controversial topic can be discussed. Freedom of expression is encouraged. The scientific validity of things posted in this forum may stray from reality quite wildly and the reader is advised to keep that in mind. Please refrain from bad language and DO NOT get overly abusive with other members. You MUST post in English. It is OK to have fiercely intense debate. This forum has no connection with CERN, the LHC or my site. The views here do not represent the forum's views or my views in any way. It is meant as a place to debate or discuss subjects that may create heated debate. Almost no moderation will occur in this forum at all.

rasalhauge wrote:
I'm open to the possibility that I might be wrong here, but my guess is that you didn't receive an email (as I said earlier) but rather made this up. Otherwise there are quite a few easy ways to prove me wrong. A.) name your source or B.) name the observatory that registered the flux.

Yes, that would be so simple for IVAN. I have to ask why he should change his pattern now since he has managed to avoid anything even approaching logic up until now.

I concur with you that everything he has to say he makes up. Like the guy on TV said "I liked to have one of those cigarettes your smoking". I think he using something that help him to see his visions.

Bored of this now Bored of IVan saying the world is gonna end Ivan are you convinced we are gonna die? cause to be honest you ain't trying to do much about it apart from sprout shit all the time so saying you are right this time we have no hope of surviving? and we will all panic because it's the end? Get a grip will ya

Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

Kasuha wrote:The real reason why Ivan and his alikes do what they do is the attention they get for it. Bad news always attract more attention than good news, regardless whether they are true or false...

no kidding

Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

I'm open to the possibility that I might be wrong here, but my guess is that you didn't receive an email (as I said earlier) but rather made this up. Otherwise there are quite a few easy ways to prove me wrong. A.) name your source or B.) name the observatory that registered the flux.

If you wont I can resend the e-mail from my e-mail box to your e-mail box. The source is not my friend and I think the information is not reliable.

But tomorrow or the day after tomorrow we will have the first collisions of heavy ions.

Will they create microscopic magnetic holes, and will we all fly into cosmos, we will know in a nearest days. The first harbinger of a growing global catastrophe is the growing flux of neutrino from the microscopic dangerous condensates (magnetic holes, strangelets, mixtures of strange nucleons with neutrons and/or other possible hyper nucleons).

These days I had investigated the properties of magnetic holes, was looking for extrema. I found them and was deeply surprised because they were numerically equal to the famous Golden Section.

Do mathematicians know about such equations? Or magnetic holes give as new equations?
1. sh(arth(a))= cos(arcsin(a));
2. ch(arth(a))=1/cos(arcsin(a));
3. a=(cos(arcsin(a)))^2=(sin(arccos(a)))^2.

The solution of these equations is a number a=0,6180339887498948482…
It’s main properties:
1+a=1/a;
a+a^2=1;
and so on.

Let’s return to magnetic holes and see at some new results.
Now we can say that the center of every elementary particle looks like a black hole, or to be more precise, - if we rake the imaginable shell of a particle in a single point and let it free at the classical radius of the particle, then the center of the particle will look as an Event Horizon. This raked pointlike shell will start to perform relativistic harmonic oscillations.

These harmonic oscillations can be visible from K inertial reference system, connected with the center of the particle, as a periodic movement along the x-axis from -r_{cl} to +r{cl} and vice verse. In a space-time scan the world line of this oscillating pointlike shell will look as a sinusoid directed in the future.

If we look at these oscillations from the successive systems of references K1, K2, K3…, were the pointlike shell is in the state of rest, we’ll receive two pseudo circumferences, - right/left and top/bottom.

Top/bottom circumference has two extrema. These extrma are situated at points x=+/-ar_{cl}, where a – Golden Section, r_{cl} – classical radius of a particle.

This motion looks as if particles weave the space at right and left sides; untwist it in the bottom of the figure, i.e. in the past; and bind the semi-spaces together, being itself as a singularity in the space-time.

In my deduction I used two modified Rindler’s wedges. My modified Rindler’s wedges move along the time axes synchronically to time flow.
The original Rindler’s wedge valid only at x>0 and connected to the point t=0 always.
This point is an Event Horizon for a special hyperbolic motion inside the wedge.

Those, who do not believe me about the Event Horizon in the Rindler’s wedge, can read a correspondent article in the Wikipedia.

The presence of Event Horizon says us about a “hole” or a “singularity” in a space-time. Now received “hole” is not the “gravitational black hole”, but a “chromomagnetic hole” or a “hole, made by nuclear forces”. This hole continues to be a “chromomagnetic hole” till the rotation it the (x, ict) plane exists. But if the particle is forced to turn in space-time by some external forces from (x, ict) to (y, z), it can eject a lepton and become a pure “magnetic hole”, or to become a constituent part of some bigger magnetic hole, rotating in a space-space plane, for example in (y, z) plane. This constituent element of magnetic hole is a pair of a charge and anticharge. It looks like a medicine pill in a tin of magnetic hole.

On the following figures you can see the space-time scans.
For the “pull” case:
For the “push” case:
Extrema correspond to the x values, where the green lines are gorisontal.
In these points x=+/-ar; v=+/-ac.

In the “pull” case: red quasi-hyperbolae begin in the bottom and finish at the top; green quasi-hyperbolae begin in the left side and finish at the right side.
In the “push” case – vice verse.
Blue line is the world line of a charge, performing harmonic oscillations along the x-axis.
Red lines are the world lines of the same charge, rotating along the right/left pseudo circumference.
Green lines are the world lines of the same charge, rotating along the top/bottom pseudo circumference.
If there is a charge, rotating in the plane (yz) with the same frequency, its world line can coincide with the blue line or to be in opposite phase.

In the bottom wedge lines are crossed. That means that there is no field there. Literary speaking, the charge draws the lines in the future regions and spends paint; the charge gathers the old paint from the past region by crossing its old lines.

Chromomagnetic field of nucleon:
After a turn from (x, ict) rotations to (y, z) rotations and after the lost of lepton, the nucleon transforms from microscopic chromomagnetic hole into magnetic hole (boson):
which is a constituent part of a bigger magnetic hole (ferromagnetic vacuum of Savidy):
As a result a Solar system can be transformed into something like this:

Last edited by MagneticTrap on Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Kasuha wrote:It's really strange that your friend has now drawn exactly the same images you have posted in the start of this thread.

haha!! nice one Kasuha

It was my text.
Kasuha, do you try to confuse the topic especially? That is a well known trick in the official science.
I’ve already translated MY text and uploaded it to a new thread “Magnetic Holes and Golden Section”. viewtopic.php?f=14&t=739

If you wont I can resend the e-mail from my e-mail box to your e-mail box. The source is not my friend and I think the information is not reliable.

But tomorrow or the day after tomorrow we will have the first collisions of heavy ions.

I have no time to translate the last my "articles", which was send by me to Russian-language forums. I'll copy it here and you can read it with the help of http://translate.google.com

That would be nice, or you can simply post the whole mail here. Either works for me, just as long as I get a name of the scientist that made this claim and the name of the observatory that noticed this peak in neutrino flux.

No need to translate, I read Cyrillic quite well. I only used Google translate since i write on a swedish type keybord and it would take forever to write otherwise. And yes, I am aware that you did indeed forward your calculations to many Russian forums. Kudos on that, but I noticed that they seem to be about as grateful as everyone else. How come?

Just out of curiousity, in your calculations, did you make your estimates based on a linear or exponential growth?

Anyway - by reading carefully responses to your previous posts you should already know that if nothing else then the bottom two pictures and your arguments about them are seriously flawed and don't correspond to reality in our universe. I'd expect you to correct these errors since then...

Kasuha wrote:… the bottom two pictures and your arguments about them are seriously flawed and don't correspond to reality in our universe. I'd expect you to correct these errors since then...

Of course, you can deny my early claims according Magnetic HOLES.
But now I added a solidly grounded new argument: Center of a particle, connected by electromagnetic forces, is an Event Horizon for its charged shell. Such notions as “Event Horizon” and “Hole” are greatly connected. So, the term “magnetic hole” itself and my early conclusions, had received one more solid prove about their correctness.

So, what we’ll have evaporating microscopic black holes or growing magnetic holes, we’ll see in the nearest days. Today they work with one bunch of ions per beam without collisions; tomorrow they plan to work with two bunches per beam with collisions. If the “process” will not be switched tomorrow, in a several days they will rise the energy and luminosity and will switch it. I’ll be greatly surprised if the Earth would not be exploded in the result of this criminal experiment.

rasalhauge wrote:
Just out of curiousity, in your calculations, did you make your estimates based on a linear or exponential growth?

Do you mean my conclusions about “500-1000 days”?

I had made a program and come to conclusion: Exponential growth of the mass of ruined matter is possible in the case, if growing droplets decay at the certain mass and then these splitted droplets grow again. In this case the Earth can be exploded in a several days after the dangerous matter creation. But I do not see the cause of the droplets decay.
If LHC creates several droplets and stopped forever, then the mass of ruined matter follows to the square parabola.
If LHC creates droplets continuously, then the mass of ruined matter follows to the cubic parabola.
Realistic values for some unknown parameters had led me to above mentioned time period 500-1000 days.